Author
Topic: Advancedboy's Designs Topic (Read 110286 times)

hi, i am a new guy here, I will post here my designs of aviation technology. the designs and upcoming ideas are solely mine. Comments welcome. Forgive my designing mediocrity, I am still at the beginning of the journey. I am a 23 years old , from Latvia, small rural town Kuldiga. My dream is to bring back manufacturing to United States , because I believe only complex, added value manufacturing could save America , and it must be resurrected. Basically I am training more on car designs and innovations, but I like aviation as well, as it represents human ingenuity and achievement.

No need to ask Jesus Christ help to post pictures. He has most important affairs out here.

The ability to post pictures is disabled for new members until you reach 5 posts. Just that. So you can post a few comments wherever you want or send a private message to overscan, the forum administrator, and ask him for permission to post pictures.

My design of the next generation multipurpose attack helicopter with a Nitinol(r)( nickel titanium alloy) safety frame RAH (xxx)Navajo. Currently it is under reworking. It has exhaust dissipation through vents at the main propeller. Nitinol is a memory metal that leaps back to its initial shape if heated. The main pilot cockpit has nitinol safety cage. Wires are connected to each safety beam, and similar to airbag, electrical current is sent through those beams after a crash landing. The nitinol frame after the crash will bend back at its initial shape.

Here is the sideview of HELITRA. The tail rotor has the first in the world twin turboprop fenestron integrated in tail section. I have also finished another medium chopper sketch with twin hubless fenestron with counterrotating propellers. Also in the works- yaw vectoring research aircraft.

Thanks for appreciating my sketches. My dream is to design cars, and put Detroit back on track by actually building cars in -house. I also dream to design the biggest airplane in the world and surpass An-225 Mrya, and return the title back to USA. I wish that some university would take me and teach me how to design in 3d, . Here is a sketch of next generation medium cargo plane Boeing Cargox. I am also in progress on iso view. The idea is that the plane would have a removable middle section of wings, that could be attached when heavier loads are carried. That section would be attached to gain additional lift. Well, i hope I can post yaw vectoring airplane in a week.

Here is the sideview of HELITRA. The tail rotor has the first in the world twin turboprop fenestron integrated in tail section. I have also finished another medium chopper sketch with twin hubless fenestron with counterrotating propellers. Also in the works- yaw vectoring research aircraft.

I really like your concepts. It's a lot harder to design something that looks like it will be flying 20 years from now than 100 years from now. Every aircraft and Helli you've posted has the important "yeah we could see really this flying" feel, probably because you put so much thought into them. Keep up the great work. As others have said, I too would like to see your take on a next generation bomber. Civil commercial aviation has had too many boring designs maybe you can figure out some solutions to that as well.

Thank you so much for your kind words, it means a lot to me! Here is the front of RAH-68 Navajo next generation large multirole attack helicopter. I tried to advance some stealth features on it. for example, canon is in a seperate bay, exhaust is dissipated through vents in main rotor and air intake nozzle is curved in a way that from the front it is hidden behind canopy curvature, the air is simply dragged in using Coanda effect. Although, who knows where the life will take me, I have this love within me.........

Thank you so much for your kind words, it means a lot to me! Here is the front of RAH-68 Navajo next generation large multirole attack helicopter. I tried to advance some stealth features on it. for example, canon is in a seperate bay, exhaust is dissipated through vents in main rotor and air intake nozzle is curved in a way that from the front it is hidden behind canopy curvature, the air is simply dragged in using Coanda effect. Although, who knows where the life will take me, I have this love within me.........

Wow, that thing just looks scary, it's almost dinosaur like with the large front facing "eyes".

The idea of the chopper fascia comes from an ancient pliosaur- liopleurodon ferox, which is believed to be the fiercest predator that ploughed prehistoric seas. The massive jawline and `face` is inspired from that animal.

Thanks for appreciating my sketches. My dream is to design cars, and put Detroit back on track by actually building cars in -house. I also dream to design the biggest airplane in the world and surpass An-225 Mrya, and return the title back to USA. I wish that some university would take me and teach me how to design in 3d, . Here is a sketch of next generation medium cargo plane Boeing Cargox. I am also in progress on iso view. The idea is that the plane would have a removable middle section of wings, that could be attached when heavier loads are carried. That section would be attached to gain additional lift. Well, i hope I can post yaw vectoring airplane in a week.

More Cool stuff ADVANCEDBOY!

I have some knowledge of ACCD (Art Center Collega Of Design) in Pasadena. They have a 8-term Bachelor of Sciencedegree in "Transportation Design". The dept. chairs' name is Stewart Reed. They teach what you are interested in,and are one of the most famous auto design schools in the world. We're talking exterior and interiordesign here. We are not talking auto engineering. You have to submit a portfolio for entrance, and if they likeyou're portfolio, you're in. If you are not ready yet, they also have a prep school availabe where they willhelp you get to the level you need to be at.

I am no expert at this, but from what I have seen I think you have a talent for this. As far as 3-D skills, it's going totake practice, practice, and practice.

Next step might be, if you are in the LA area, arrange a 1-hour session with one of ACCD's admission counselors. If you don't live in that area, you can also mail your work to them and then conduct the session over the phone as they're looking at your work. You also could maybe call Stweart Reed and talk to him. He is a very nice guy. I've methim. He's there for his current and future students. Just tell him what you want to do. They have a web site to find phone numbers.

After the meetings above, I think you could actually develop a plan, or at least know more.

There are other design schools as well. CCS (Center for Creative Studies) in Detroit. The benefit of that schoolis that the Detroit auto companies are more tightly involved with the school. You can also do a session with CCS likeI recommended with ACCD.

There are other schools as well. I recall a school in San Francisco run by a famous ex-auto designer.

This is another view of Boeing Cargox regional cargo plane. It differs from front view as I tried to change some details. Basically a technological innovation is the aileron behind the engines . It is directly where the exhaust of engine is, when the airplane is changing pitch, the aileron not only changes the air stream direction on the wing , but it also changes the direction of exhaust in the engines. As it basically uses the same aeleron that is on the wing , but is prolonged to go along the engine exhaust, this would allow to save weight and installation of additional motors and actuators. And thank you so much for giving me inspiration to work harder an come up with new ideas. I would really gladly apply for this university. I have so many car sketches, that I will have to filter through them which ones to keep, and which ones to discard,. I will start thinking on details how exactly to try to apply for studies there, as it is a very crucial, probably a life changing event...

This is the next generation of stealth bomber B3. It has a new principle of yaw control. It has no rudder,but it uses front wing edge drag to achieve steering. The wing edge is electrostatically charged, which reduces drag by about 40 per cent. The steering( yaw control) is achieved by switching electrostatic charging off in one of the wings, thus increasing drag, which will allow the aircraft to change direction. This is just a sketch, I will post soon another sketch , which will have a rudder , and could be built to check this type of steering using rudders as back up for the technology demonstrator. The aircraft uses negative delta wing in order to have a maximum length available for electrostatic charging up front. The edges of the inner rim of the wing can be charged as well. This is not the final version as it is only a rough sketch, but it gives a hint where I would like the future to go:) Talking about crazy, alright here it goes. The inner empty rectangles within each of the wings can be used for bombs. The bombs would have a shape so that they would perfectly fill in the wing and their shape would give additional lift once they are installed in the wings. Once the bombs are dropped, the lift of course is reduced, but so is the weight of the airplane!

Sikorsky Skya concept. Next generation of medium helicopters. It has a new type of windows, similar as used on buses. It also has a turboprop engine at rear, with ailerons going in the fenestron to control pitch. I am still practicing and I have no specific education or good skills or tools, but I have my passion:) Hope you like it. I am still working on b3 and Yavex.

The project got inspiration from a folk tale about the crow and the cheese. Remember the crow was sitting in a tree with a large piece of cheese,? ..etc. The experiment is as follows. Corvus UAV is piggy-riding Boeing 80-8. At certain altitude the engines of 80-8 are shut off, while the steering input is still from 80-8. The thrust is then activated from Corvus. So basically the duo would fly using aelerons and rudders of 80-8 but thrust from Corvus. This would be the first phase in creating next generation UAVs that could be used in far future for carrying large aircraft to runways, or saving aircraft that have engine problems. And thanks for the kind comments, it gives me inspiration:)

As I also do car designing sketches, I get some inspiration from aviation to cars, and vice versa. Here is the idea of a retractable sideview mirror which originates from retractable gears on aircraft. it is designed for a purpose of saving fuel on drag.

G'day AdvancedboyI find your Boeing Cargox design very interesting!!Is this intended as a military aircraft?I particularly like the fact that the main wing-spar does not go through the fuselage! Meaning no interference with the main cargo compartment!If I my.......I think your design's main landing gear might need beefing up

Keep up the great work, and best of luck with your future and aspirations

RegardsPioneer

Logged

And remember…remember the glory is not the exhortation of war, but the exhortation of man.Mans nobility, made transcendent in the fiery crucible of war.Faithfulness and fortitude.Gentleness and compassion.I am honored to be your brother.”

Thanks. I will need to revisit Cargox. The wing angle is too much forward and the downward tips should go upwards. if I have more time I will try to fix it. Probably the wings will come slightly downwards.

Next gen Multirole chopper has landed. I know I am still a lame duck in design, especially considering I am not using even any good programs or stylus pen, just a mouse. I believe in small steps and hard work... Don`t worry once I improve I will get to sketching the largest airplane evar:)

This is the fist time I checked this topic in a long while and needless to say, you've kept up the amazing work. Save up for a stylus pen if you can. I'm still in awe that you're able to do all of this outstanding work with just a mouse, I'm sure your work quality will reach new heights. In the meantime you've built up a significant portfolio of great work and should look around at furthering your education.

Yes, you can use my sketches . Thanks for your kind words, it means a lot to me. here is 6th generation of fighter jet.Proriger. It has a new afterburner experiment. Basically the fuel is injected directly in the exhaust plume igniting the fuel. The rear part is extended, and injection nozzles are far from exhaust.( in 2 protruded extensions, 6 nozzles on each side). It allows to play with injection distance and experiment can be conducted at what distance afterburner injection works the best, probably at higher speed we can inject fuel farther and farther away from the exhaust nozzle. besides, the thrust vectoring is inaffected, because at hihg speeds when the afterburner kicks in, you can not use thrust vectoring anyway. Thrust vectoring at high angles would veer away the jet plume alignment with afterburner nozzles. Now I am working on the front view of the same aircraft. it will have another new feature previously not used on airplanes. the kind words. It means a lot. P.S.- I am seriously considering to applying for designing program in a University, I would like to study in US, besides aviation I have a car department, I have to practice for that one too:)

Front view. I have always pondered why would one waste material and potential strength structure, such as intake manifold or intake vent and have it seperately from the fuselage or wing. I decided to join intake vents together with wings, thus the wing interior rails go through around the vents. The wing now has a steeper angle at the place of attachment to the fuselage thus giving more strength to the wing. Inside the vents you can see winglets or controllable aelerons which would work along exterior winglets. Those winglets can bee used for dogfight supremacy and low speed landing .

I have always pondered why would one waste material and potential strength structure, such as intake manifold or intake vent and have it seperately from the fuselage or wing.

Are you talking perhaps about the boundary layer diverter? It's supposed to keep the sluggish air that lies close to the fuselage from being ingested into the engine. Modern designs like the diverterless supersonic inlet (DSI) can avoid that without a diverter, however (Look at the F-35 and J-10B).

This is next generation trainer jet Boeing T-X Tyro. The instructor is not actually even sitting in the jet. He is controlling and duplicating all control systems at the remote command center. Another novelty is another visual stealth improvement. Inlet nozzles usually are painted white so visually shadows wouldn`t cast such black spots inside the vents. This jet has a simple principle of lighting inside the inlet nozzles that is changing it`s luminosity depending on light conditions outside. A simple, inexpensive lighting system could improve visual stealth from front view. During nighttime the lighting is redundant, of course. personally I think this jet lacks unique design, but anyway...the journey continues:)

Aurora. Low speed approach and landing experiment. This is a version with swivel wings. Streamlined wings are good for high speed, yet it causes problems for landing, as it requires higher speeds for landing, thus necessitating longer runways. And for a spy plane we don`t want a long runway. I think, there is no need for the whole wing to be swiveled as it would cause problems for any surface attachments. the part of the wing goes under the hull, so when the wing is swiveled out, it also increases the air cushion area, not only the leading edge. In this configuration this airplane could be also used for lower speed cruising or carrying heavier equipment. P.S.- Stargazer, this configuration is for the purpose of electrostatic charging of the leading edge, allowing to steer the vessel once the charging is switched off on one of the wings.

Well, all these posts are my imagination and none are done by real Tier 1 companies. You can read what my dream is at the beginning of the thread. I am sketching to improve. Anyway, here is the front view of RAH-68 in single pilot configuration, as I am trying to develop that chopper further.

Moderator, please don`t delete this. As I stated, I am also practicing car design and sketching, so I decided to post one car sketch as well, so you have an idea what kind of car sketches I do. Here is a Buick Maelstrom concept which has air intake that I will also try to incorporate in some airplanes. I will try to improve dynamics and try to invent more productive inlet duct. Thanks for following my thread!

Helitra( Heavy Lift Transport) front view revisited. I suggest using a graphite derivative - graphene for front windshield. Using about 10 layers of graphene sandwiched between 2 layers of glass the same way like car windshields do, we can manipulate window opacity by sending voltage through it. We could make it even nuclear blast proof by simply adding more graphene layers. The problem is graphene manufacturing is still in its infancy,booo, boo.

A fast ideation of a vertocopter- a symbio between a forward swept airplane and a twin-rotored chopper. The rotors are counterrotating and tilt at 2-4 degrees, the air from rotor tips is channeled to air intake vents. Max alleged speed- 670km/h. The lift relies on decreased size of rotors and wings.

I want to move the initial heat from drag as far away as possible from fuselage, hence the long nose and front winglets. As to this section, I think it is Ok, as I also try to innovate and speculate of the future elements within aviation, trying not to step over the edge of existing physics and feasibility.here is a sketch of a car Dodge Ibex, so the viewers don`t get too bored with my airplane sketches. I hope I don`t get this one deleted for being not too avio-istic:)

Here is RAH -69 chopper with 2 small turbines instead of rear rotor.An ideation sketch. I hope I am not datadumping this thread with childish ideas. I really need to get a serious degree in design, and I want to take a new path in aviation or design, yet stay within realm of feasibility. I really need to study 3d modelling so I can push forward at completely different level.

Here is my `entry` , initial sketch for 6th generation fighter jet. Northrop -Grumman YF-4XXa. I might consider working on top view as well.Thank you so much for support and advice, I hope I can reward this forum with more innovation, and hopefully I can improve my designing skills.

Here is my next sketch. Next generation medium size cargo plane for Boeing. C-22X Cargox Thanks for all your replies. Afterwards I decides to compare it with existing cargo planes C-17 and Y-20. While I designed the Cargox from clean sheet without looking at any airplanes, it still has some similarities.

Boeing Cargox and an experimantslal airplane for Scaled Composites piggy -riding. I have always considered that wing structure could be made really strong by incorporating engines in them, the problem is that once the forces start bending the wing so does the inner surfaces of the engine exposing it to risky tolerances towards blades. i suggest using double assy where engine wouldn`t be a part of structural integrity but would be rather attached to inner surface on bushings.

Wings with an engine inside aren't the best solution, as the experience with e.g. the Nimrod, Vulcan and Buccaneer.

1. The wing spars aren't necessarily any stronger. The engine doesn't contribute to the rigidity of the wing (if it's a jet). Piston engines have a big, rigid engine block that can be used as a structural part. Turbines don't. 2. the hole in the wing spar dictates the engine size; the consequence is that you can't uprate the engines without redesigning the wing spar.

RAH 69 `Annihila`. Next generation . Basically I took my previous sketch of RAH-69, which I posted here some time ago and tried to cut out the ugly. Basically it will have some new features for helicopter industry. Behold- the double turbines partly integrated in fuselage for speed and counterbalancing the main rotor. the rear landing gear will have an actuator so it can be either lifted up or lowered. By lowering the rear landing gear the engines are slightly angled towards the gravel/landing strip. This is for more effective taxiing on runway or liftoff in motion.The canon bay will be incorporated in fuselage and will have a seperate hatch right under FLIR module. There will be 4 weapon bays. As you can see there are 2 hatch doors one above another. Each of them opens opposite ways, while the weapons, behold this, are located on sliding rails and are winded on a curved magazine. The whole weapon bay has 4 rolls of magazines with attached rails that slide a rail outwards once the door is opened.Maybe I will post later a graphic depiction of that. Plus graphene film coated windshield. I will still work more on air venting and stealth mode. thank you all for your kind words and encouragement. Comments encouraged:)

Here is F-19 jet plane. I never take existing airplanes or sketches. This time I did, I took F-19 and decided to go over it and redesign it my way. I consider that the original f-19 design should have been built, it looked so much like designed by professional insiders. Hope you like this one as well

I used industrial plastiline to create the shape, then fiberglass fabric with epoxy. Then fiberglass putty, after that , finishing putty. then all sandpapered, finalised with a gray primer. I only use SketchPro program for sketches, as I m not taught how to deal with better programmes. I used sketchpro just to add minor tweaks and corrections to the chopper. I know I am not good enough, but I hope to get into some university for further studies, so I could nail it:) All that i have learnt so far is on my own. And thanks to all of you folks for your kind comments and responses!

Here is my car. I built it also using fiberglass, . It is based on Dodge Stealth. Took me 2 years to do it.

If you ask me what took me so long to build it. Well, interior and all the actuators and wiring and additional equipment took a lot of time. Here you can see redone luggage compartment a.k.a. trunk. the trunk lid is power, so is the rear spoiler, all parts are synthetic red leather wrapped, which took ungodly amount of time to do it with precision and nice fit and finish. Headrests, rear speaker panel, and many gazillion more parts were built and added.And all of them had to be integrated so that they look orignal , as if made by the manufacturer. I work only this way. Thanks, and comments and questions invited.

Proriger. Furthering. Sneak peek. Negative canards for gravity ballet. I tried to take it to the next level in terms of air intake. I propose to create intake similar to shark gills so that we could bend surface of it according to the speed and air needed. We can use simple actuators to lift and bend the surface upwards if more air is necessary, I think we have such materials to do that.

I have no skills to create 3d images, but I must develop language that I can incorporate in my designs once I make my first baby steps in 3d. Here is a sketch of the future coming. We must go forward on the verge of existing physics. Here is the nex gen air supremacy jet . A view at belly. Some parts of it are still classified. Top view might join later.

Question:Why are you using so many control-surfaces? they increase drag and with 3 dimension thrust vectoring you can eliminate the rudder, and you can mix the ailerons and elevators. Another disadvantage of the control surfaces is that is makes it harder for the aircraft to be stealth.

I guess the best fighter shape would be some sort of raindrop, with one engine.

Thanks for the kind words. I will use them as sparks to ignite the torch to carry on. It is the dream in inception. Then it is a skillful sculptor to chisel off everything redundant. Albeit my hands are shaky, misguided by emotion over reason, ego over skills and yearning for the tangible result over articulated effort, I toddle forward. I will take that path less walked by...as it has been done eons before me, and will be ..eons after.

Boeing 797. I decided to make it a twin deck to flirt with superjumbo category. Instead of having fully-fledged 2 decks as on A380 or a ` dromedary hump` as on venerable 747, I went for a second floor as a full deck, while the first is beneath and shares compartments with cargo deck. I went for this version in order no to increase the circumference of the fuselage too much, and my hunch tells me we could decrease the volume of cargo compartments. As you can see right next to the lower deck there are wing assemblies. And that is all about that:)

This is a cargo utility helicopter. I have not finished it yet. I am so far trying to smooth out the shape and practice new designs, that would be within building feasibility. I like future within a grasp of technology This could propbably be a Chinook replacement:) I also promised that I will present a new tail section control, I just have to resketch it . I might revisit my older designs as well in ordet to finalise them.

This is a camera I designed for Kodak. You can turn around the LED screen. I might show you the other side of the camera if you are interested. Not very airplane related, but then again you might keep it in your pocket, once on a plane:)

More than a year ago I designed a jet trainer called Boeing T-X. Now it is time to redesign it. Here is the teaser of it. T-X is currently under construction. Thank you Stargazer 2006 for your comment and appreciation.

About your "Mercury Promys"Or maybe first, as not to be misunderstood. Your renderings look great, I wish, I would be able to handle those toolsas professionally as you, said with all proper respect ! I think, your car designs actually are much better, than your designs of aircraft. I really can imagine, that those cars, you created, would make it into production ! I saw it and thought for me " Ah, could be the after next version of our Opel Zafira " (If Opel is still there then at all !). But to my opinion, the faults of the Zafira here seem at least not to berectified, but maybe even enhanced. The A-pillar looks very strong, probably good for safety, but bad for drivers view.In the Zafira, skewed forward-looking already is difficult, although window framing, which is strong in your design, still is relatively slim there. Again, that design looks great, but I think (as already expressed in the Bell 525 thread), to myopinion nowadays there are a lot of cases, where the functionality takes second place against design and the aggrievedone is the customer. There often seem to be a lack of communication between designers and customers, or maybe justtoo much public relations ? I know, that especially in the case of consumer electronics "design rules it all", but combiningboth aspects should be possible, I think ?

I agree with you. That Mercury kinda looks similar to Opel Zafira. Unintentionally. I also agree that A-pillar is too thick and could impede the front view. That is why I added the small window in the corner of A-pillar. Might be still too small though. I think my design also looks too conventional, bu I am still practicing and trying to improve. I might reconsider it later, but then again for concept vehicles desgners are given somewhat a `poetic pass`.

Hard to tell, but the B-pillar of your design seems to be quite slim, so maybe the A-pillar actually has to bestronger, than usual. One problem with those minivans is, to my opinion, that due to the higher ceiling,you are seated quite far away from the forward windscreen edge, so the panoramic effect of the curved windscreengets lost. And it's hard, to wipe the inner side ! Of course, blower and air-condition should make this unnecessary,but it still takes quite a lot of time, so a rag still is the faster solution .. as long, as your seat-belt isn't fastened.Don't worry about the similarity to the Zafira. Ours is silver coloured, so coming back into the garage, you generallysea dozens of cars, that look like ours ...

Back on your Corvette item. I immediately recognized it as a Vette.How about trying your own shot at a split window coupe. Or a split windowcoupe/convertible? Not sure anyone has ever taken a shot at something like that.Understand what I mean? A Vette comvertible that can transform into a splitwindow coupe and back again.

As far as the McLaren P1. You toned it down! :-) It's a nice job you did, but personally I like the outrageousness of the original and howthe normal things ike vehicle lights, radiator inlets, etc work into the wild design.But I am sure some P1 customers may agree with you and prefer your example. :-)

I always like your helicopters!

Looking forward to your Boeing 797!!

Love your B-3 design! Ever done people? Maybe a cool flight line scene from above(because of the cool shape) of a number of B-3's and a scramble near dusk where youcan play with lighting of taxi ways, the ramp, and runway and maybe other lights and theair crew cars. There is a neat shot of Whiteman AFB from above showing a number of B-2's on the ramp. Fo some reason it's hard to find online. But find that and use that for inspirationmaybe. Just an idea.

Thank you , Shockonlip, but I am not really sure what you mean by split window . Do you mean something like targa roof with the roof split in 2 segments? Or you mean retractable hardtop like on some versions of Pontiac G6 Coupe? Or you mean windows seperated by B and C pillars that are visible and not covered by glass?As to my designs, I will revisit them and start posting them back in the same places that they are now. You wil only see that the post has been edited and the old redfering has disappeared. I hope to revisit majority of them. Of course I will try to add some new stuff as well.

Boeing T-X next gen trainer jet. Some new features. The rear landing gear is moved backwards . I did it on purpose. As rookies might expose the jet to extreme manoeuvers while taking off or landing it is crucial that even at extreme angle of landing or take off the landing gear hits the tarmac first, not the exhaust nozzle tips of the engine. Also the front part of underbelly has a small winglet which not only stabilises air stream but is also used if front landing gear is damaged or can`t be retracted. The winglet has a graphene tip and can stop the jet without damaging the fuselage underbelly and air intake parts. If the winglet was not there not only the fuselage would be damaged but shrapnels of asphalt and fuselage parts would be sucked in the air intake damaging the engine as well. Hope you` re enjoying the sketch and ideations behind it:) (I re -edited it once more and moved the landing gear forward.)

It seems to be intended not only as a trainer, isn't it ? There are weapons bays and for a pure trainerstealth probably isn't necessary. But many trainers double as llight strike or fighter aircraft. and maybethe time, this design enters service, the maintenace problems with stealthy aircraft will be overcome completely. In the moment, I think, they simply would rule out a stealth trainer, just because of costissues.The point that to my opinion will create severe problems is the main gear. Positioned as far aft, as it is, you'll need a very strong aerodynamic force to get the front wheel from the ground and rotate the aircraft.And the fin as "emergency skid" seems not to be such a good idea, too. It had to be eytremely strong withan appropriate (and probably heavy) attachement to the fuselage. I just would call it a blade antenna.

Thank you , Shockonlip, but I am not really sure what you mean by split window . Do you mean something like targa roof with the roof split in 2 segments? Or you mean retractable hardtop like on some versions of Pontiac G6 Coupe? Or you mean windows seperated by B and C pillars that are visible and not covered by glass?As to my designs, I will revisit them and start posting them back in the same places that they are now. You wil only see that the post has been edited and the old redfering has disappeared. I hope to revisit majority of them. Of course I will try to add some new stuff as well.

Hi.It's like the B-pillar between the front and rear-side windows only it's in the middle of the rear window(splits the rear window into two pieces).But it is not just a splitter, it is done in a stylistic manner. It adds beauty.On the Corvette it was only done in the 1963 Corvette Coupe.As such it makes the 1963 Corvette coupes more valuable and attractive to enthusiasts.And because of that, it was done on the C7 concept coupe as well (in a more modern fashion).I enclosed small photos of both.Now, retractible hardtops are popular these days.I wonder if a retractible split window coupe could be done?

I am not sure if I might add split windows, but this Friday Corvette C7 in my interpretation is coming. I decided to revisit the just released legend:) As to retractable hardtops, US companies are not eager to make them, as there are not many companies that would be willing to tackle the task, and believe me it is a complex one. If I remember correctly Metalcrafters and also Valmet from Finland are usually trusted these tasks. As to split windows plus retractable hardtop, why not, I guess it should be possible.

Hi everyone! To admit , I like to invent stuff, but I like to be somewhat reasonable and invent things that would be feasible for the nearest future. I try to keep unicorns out of my designs as much as possible, but of course, my inexpierence, and lack of knowledge blurrs this borderline, and some of them simply ride in:) Anyhowz, this is my new idea for Lockheed`s future experimental aircraft. I decided to implement retractable or foldable rudders. Once the aircraft is airborne the rudders retract( fold) into wings creating a flat surface. The same flaps that are used for rudders now are a part of the wing working as flappers/ailerons. As you can see at the same time the wing also has flappers. Thus by moving rudder flappers and wing flappers/ailerons to opposite directions ( for example rudder based flapper moves upwards, while the wing based flapper moves downward) . This way we can control pitch , yaw and roll. I think this design would allow us make new experiments in aircraft controls and manipulate with maneouverability, because the wing area can be reduced by simply folding back the rudders. this design is not finalised, and will also provde belly view of the craft. I have also created a new chopper control , but I will sketch it later. Actually, I have been postponing it for some time already:)

I decided to post my interpretations of Bell 525 Relentless here, so they don`t get lost along the forum. You have seen these already. Warning- this is only my version of the 525 , and is not a complete design of mine.

The rudder doesn`t need airfoil, as it doesn`t need pressure difference and doesn`t need to provide lift. The lift will be provided by main wings and as the folded in rudders occupy only a small percentage of the total wing area, the airfoil should be minimal or negligible. What it does need is a slight camber once retracted, which could be provided by actuators. The mimicking of airfoil can be achieved by slightly moving downwards flaps on the rudders. As to Ka -92 resembling my 525 derivative, it clearly shows that no line matches, so the patent issue is non applicable. Besides, Kamov is a serious engineering company and wouldn`t resort to such nitpicking issues.

Here is the frontal view. It will have the first variable DSI control. So we can go ubersonic:) while manipulating air inlet air pressure and speed. I will work on it later once I get more time for it and more gumption:) This is an initial sketch, and will be changed, fine-tuned and redone. On a sidenote. I want these machines to be built for the sake of beauty. Not for the sake of destruction. When a panther jumps in an attack we freeze the moment of leap. We enjoy the grace and the muscles playing underneath the silky skin. We `njoy the dramatic proportions and the shifting mass of strength that propells the beast of unimaginable strength. It is about Vivaldi, the music frozen in metal, it is the melody of heated air swooshing along the canards once a Su-37 alike bird performs a cobra or Nestorov`s circular ballet, it is about those tears from corners of eyes of chief engineers and their trembling hands and fingers they try to hide in their pockets, once their cherished birds go airborne in maiden flights. It is about ingenuity, tears and blisters, sighs and smiles.. it is about us, who we are as men, born to be be free, untamed, and tamed for a purpose.

When I draw wheels in a side view, I do them as circles. The program that I use (Inkscape) has a keyboard option to make ovals into circles, so I don't have to rely on my eyes.... then I have to flatten the ground contact patch manually to make them a little more realistic...

Hi guys, haven`t been around for a while. I `ve been working for the past 2 weeks on Boeing 797 `Journeo` next generation passenger aircraft. I am building a scale model. So far only the fuselage is built for 70 %. The rollout should be in august I guess. Once the Journeo gets engine upgrades in 10 years, it will be called JourNEO` So far I can`t decide should I go with the design of 797 depicted a couple of pages back or use this design . leave your suggestions, thanks.

Progress report. So far the fuselage is 80 % finished. And one wing is ready as well. Now applying white primer to sandpapeer it later. After that the second wing will be built. Then both wings will be attached to the fuselage and aligned. After that The wings will be cut off about the area of engine location then they will be reattached at angle with fiberglass putty to create curvature of wings as viewed from front. After that I will work on engine attavhment panels. All elements are designed and built from scratch without any references to any existing designs, that is why it wil take me some more time to fine-adjust design details. the only design element I will use an offshelf part is chrome-coated front part of engine cowling which wil be taken from a lamp. Thank you for following my design attempts.

You might be right, I could try to change the landing gear a bit, as I don`t want to change visual slope and mass of the aircraft. I also revisited fin vectoring jet posted here not so long time ago. Here it is.

Progress report 2. The wing design has been finalised for 85 %(the wings were built seperately , then attached to the fuselage, after that they were cut in a segment and attached at angle), the fuselage is 85 % finalised. Engines are not attached, they are on the floor but they represent their approximate location once attached. Attachment pylons are not built yet but I am working on it. The large pylons where the rear engines will be attached haven`t been finalised yet, and various designs are under consideration.The rear twin vertical stabilisers haven`t been designed yet. Total project readiness 40%. Projected symmetry deviation- 1mm( approx. size-100cm x 115cm) Materials used- plastic, fiberglass, steel, ceramics. Projected rollout - end of August.

* 797 will have nex gen General Electric engines with new blades that are attached not only to to inner axis but outer as well similar to rotors on some shrouded fans. This will help to preserve engine integrity in case an alien object penetrates the air intake. A single blade will be never broken out completely only in the segment it absorbs the direct hit. Additional weight to the engine is estimated no more than 30kg.* The configuration of wings above fuselage was chosen in order to install high -bypass jet engines. The engines stand high enough not to compromise air intake quality by sucking in runway debris. Another reason was improved visibility for passengers, as the wings won`t obstruct the view now.* Emergency doors and passenger doors will have very large windows as the door window size and shape doesn`t directly compromise fuselage integrity and strength, while the windows directly installed in a fuselage do. More innovation to come .....

Looks good and easy reconfigurable for military tasks such as tanker or even strategic transport.I'm just not quite sure about the very large box tail. In combination with the small canards and the big flaps on the inner wing section, I could imagine, that a much smallerr one would give sufficientcontrol authority and save a lot of weight.

Probably the rear section stabilizers could be a notch smaller, but I designed them instinctively, and the size of both vertical stabilizers seemed to fit, I might be wrong. Anyway, here is another view.

Here is my next sketch. Next generation medium size cargo plane for Boeing. C-22X Cargox Thanks for all your replies. Afterwards I decides to compare it with existing cargo planes C-17 and Y-20. While I designed the Cargox from clean sheet without looking at any airplanes, it still has some similarities.

By the way,

I submitted a draft for a transport aircraft from my creation like this concept to the Boeing in 2008,but it differedin many details and it was a STOL design.

Thank you for your replies. I still haven`t done the passenger windows and I will post them as soon as I have them finished. I am planning to build another airplane, but I would like you to participate and vote which airplane from my designs you would like to be built. Or I could build an airplane whose design is still ` classified` and I haven`t posted it yet. One consideration is a future strategic bomber design which I have sketched in 2 seperate designs. The details are not all clear yet, but I like that it would be a challenge. It will be called BX-3`Stratosfear`.

Currently I am reworking 797 tail section. It will be narrowed in size and canards added. Actually it might be ready by tomorrow.I am also considering my next project. It could be either further development of Proriger or B-3 `Stratosfear`, which I haven`t posted yet. By my next project I mean I could build a model of it. But it will take muh longer time, as Idon`t have vacation and enough free time. If given a `go` it might see a rollout by June-july 2014. Here is Proriger. It is unfinalised and provides a draft sketch and ideation.

797 `Journeo` revisited.One version has additional horizontal stabilizers. Maybe that should be established as the final version, I don`t know. But as the whole hor/vert stabilizer section got narrowed down it could necessitate additional horizontal stabilizers.

Further development of Proriger. I also added one of the versions of B-3` Stratosfear` , which is unfinalised. It will have a couple of large actuators implanted in front part of the nose section . The wings will be flexible and the actuators by lifting up front part of the wing will control pitch. As to Proriger- I would like to build actually a mockup. 1:1 size . But I can`t do it alone. It would take about 2 years to build it. If someone is willing to be part of it, is rich and could provide materials, space and tools, shelter and just the basic survival staples such as food, I would go for it without any pay whatsoever. The mockup of course would stay in US, and could be displayed upon agreement. I will also need at least one more person to work on the project, that is a hands on guy on technical issues and would work along me. The best would be a team of 3 people . That would be a great challenge and a new xplane for US . It would be approx. 22 metres long . I know, I sound silly, almost out of my mind, but , think for a moment, there are many aviation buffs, that would welcome such an endeavour.

Initial sketch for Gulfstream NeX business jet. Undeveloped yet. the surface of the main wing area will be illuminated with a projection. Basically a camera will film the ground below and a projector will then simulate a semi-transparency of wings. Will not work in very light conditions but in dusk and night it might look awesome.

And so the endless circle of life comes to an end, meaningless and grim. Why did they live, and why did they die? No reason. Two hundred million years of evolution snuffed out, for in the end Nature is horrific and teaches us nothing

Thank you for your replies, and Orionblamblam, thanks for your reserved support via evasive eloquence:) Curently I am working on details for various airframes, including Cargonaut, which should see daylight in 2014-15. Another jet is in the works, might post it a notch later. I still can`t decide which airplane I should start building this year.Anyhowz, I also designed a new logo for Vivitar , and added a new slogan. Rather out of sadness, if you know my dreams.........

Northrop -Grumman Slamdunk manned version. I might add iso- view later. Hopefully I can post Cargonaut some time later, as I am working on its details. I have given it `a go` and it is going to be built. Thanks.

Currently I am working on Cargonaut.( I have started the fuselage) This is a rendering of possible engine configuration for it. It will have a unique fuselage, wings, etc. This pic simply illustrates the possible engine placement using Journeo as a sample. What do you think, will this work?

How do you think your aircraft will fly? Maybe look closer to the size of the control surfaces of your aircraft. And what will the heat of the engines do to your fuselage? and wouldn't it be rather loud?

How do you think your aircraft will fly? Maybe look closer to the size of the control surfaces of your aircraft. And what will the heat of the engines do to your fuselage? and wouldn't it be rather loud?

1. The noise wouldn`t be an issue, as the engines are not directly attached to the fuselage and vibration is not transfered directly. Even if they were attached to the fuselage it wouldn`t cause any problems. ( Check Tu-104 , for example.)2. The size or rather area of control surface is sufficient, you should check other `Journeo` pictures for a point of reference. This picture is shot from front and perspective of wings gives impression that control surface area is insufficient.3. I also question that heat would be a problem to the fuselage. As you can see it is apart from it, and the exhaust plume would reach its lateral expansion already in area behind the aircraft.

I would be rather afraid of aerodynamic problems due to the close spacing ofthe inner nacelles to the fuselage. Putting the engines further outboard on a single pylon for each pair shouldn't be a structural problem, I think.

You will have serious structural issues when the wings try to flex, putting loads through the engine struts. You are best off to let the flappy bits flap.

I have seen this on a smaller scale on a helicopter project where an enlarged battery tray was attached to the tail boom and the adjacent fuselage. As the tail boom flexed the battery tray cracked. Beefing up the tray just produced cracks in the tail boom. Detaching the tray completely from the fuselage led to no cracks, and lighter structure.

I might agree with some of your concerns. But I don`t want to remove unorthodox ideas and make the plane....plain. As to wing elasticity, the closer we move to the fuselage the less amplitude of wing movement we have. To compensate the probable wing movement I might add a curvature( to dissipate tension) in small winglets between engine nacelles and fuselage. As to aerodynamic issues dealing with engine proximity to fuselage, I need more detailed elaboration on the nature of probable issues.

No, I don`t have any other perspective views of this concept, but I can sketch some if you give me some time. As I am still practicing I am not that good at isometric views, so it will take time. Small steps:) Here is `nvader UAV version.

Both look great, but the wheels seem to be squeezed vertically. On the main gear legs, this could mean a certain camber of the wheels, but on the nose wheel probably not. So maybe the whole drawing is somewhat distorted ?

Jemiba, the wheels might look squeeed because of aspect ratio of my screen. As Pedrospe wanted other views of the same concept I added Lockheed-Martin `nvader UAV flyover view where the belly of the craft is visible.

Cargonaut . Progress report. I think I wion`t able to have a rollout in August, it might take me longer to shape it the way I want it, so it might be ready by November probably. It will have v shaped vert. stabilizers, new wing and pylon connection system, new type of sharklets, double APUs. Here is a sideview, I will add later iso- belly view. P.S. -Pedrospe, I think `nvader might be a `stealth high altitude loitering platform`:)

Nice pic AB, but the aero slots aft of the doors are important for drag reduction as well as feeding the big wing that will appear on the GTLM version. Also, now that you closed off the radiator efflux ramps up front, where is the flow from the duct going? Those ramps generate a lot of downforce, which is why they're there in the first place (ref: Corvette C7.R).

A sketch of unfinalised jet concept. Front view. The previous chopper sketch was redone. I also added a jigsaw of various concept sketches that I have not finished. They will be finalised one by one , hopefully:)

I am enjoying the conceptual artwork, thanks for sharing. For a little bit of inspiration, if you are willing to take requests, I have always thought that the Mignet two-axis tandem-wing formula would make a great STOL assault transport at a fraction of the cost of an equivalent rotorcraft. What do you think something like that might look like, perhaps inspired by the Croses B-EC-9 Para Cargo? Cheers, Matthew

Martin Bayer, I was not aware of Thunderbird 2 existence. And I don`t think they have any significant commonalities. Anyhowz, this is a logo for an alleged Northrop -Grumman classified and experimental aircraft unit.

Martin Bayer, I was not aware of Thunderbird 2 existence. And I don`t think they have any significant commonalities.

If you weren't aware of the design before, perhaps you haven't seen yet what it looks like without a pod - hence my (admittedly somewhat facetious) question whether that would also be an added feature for your concept...

Cluttonfred, here are some initial ideations, I can choose probably one of them and try to polish it into a more decent shape:)

Thanks so much, I am certainly jealous of your artistic skills. These are great sketches, but you seem to have gone with more of a tailless biplane than the tandem wing I had in mind. In fact, one of those looks a bit like a biplane version of the Northrop XP-79B Flying Ram.

A sketch for an unmanned aerial vehicle. Initial overall design. I will post some sketches of a bi-plane tomorrow.

Ohh... You are already working for Shenyang in China and designed their Divine Eagle UAV !??

Logged

He was my North, my South, my East and West,My working week and my Sunday rest,My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong....For nothing now can ever come to any good.-------------------------------------------------W.H.Auden (1945)

A small regional jet for a US manufacturer, an almost finished sketch. I am also working on Boeing regional jet- BOREAL, but it will take some time. And a Chevrolet coupe sketch, some changes might apply.

Northrop-Grumman Widebody Passenger Jet. Further sketching. Initially I thought of adding solar panels on the roof as the wide fuselage would allow to stack them. Also flying above clouds would allow uninterrupted source of energy. But now I am not so convinced. I am doubtful if the additional mass and substructure to house it would justify the investment and if the solar panels would be powerful enough to generate enough energy to compete with jet fuel in any comparable fashion. So I left the roof area blank just marking the approximate location. Also I had this idea of making various versions for the jet with various passenger capacity. Usually the capacity is increased by stretching the existing versions lengthwise, I decided to go width-wise where various versions could be created adding different length inter- beams. The curvature of beams( for different versions) would be the same , just length would be different. The only thing I don`t like that there would be a necessity to widen cockpit area as well which would be costly.

Fascinating way you integrated wing leading edge and engine nacelle on the NGW airliner!

Existing prodded engine nacelles are easy to maintain and solve several structural functions, but interference drag can be a b@&$!Example: the hassle Boeing goes through every time they up-engine their 727.

By "easy to maintain" I mean quick access via large, hinged panels/hatches. Separate nacelles also facilitate quick engine changes by allowing access from most angles. At minimum you want to retain easy access to half or 3/4 the circumference of the engine. Think about easily approaching it with a replacement engine on a fork-lift.Structurally, nacelles hang the weight/mass forward of the wing spar/structure reducing flutter tendencies.

Aerodynamically, it is simpler to keep the engine inlet even with or ahead of the wing leading edge, to keep smooth airflow into the engine.

I have often wondered if the World War 2-vintage B-24 bomber would have been more efficient if they had squared the engine surpercharger intakes, flattened them and blended them into the wing's leading edge and top skin?

Your sketches are amazing in that you seem to intuitively understand most of balance and aerodynamic concepts while still sketching more graceful, flowing lines than anyone else.

Could we please see more of your sketches of engine nacelles blended into wing leading edges or tail leading edges?Maybe a spiral leading edge extending from the wing center-section blended into the leading edge of the engine nacelle on your BOREAL?

Thank you for liking my sketches! I have a couple of passenger aircraft sketches with blended engines into leading edge, but they are raw and I must still work on them. For flattering air from aircraft surfaces we have 3 options- diverters, drilled holes with suction and a bump( I don`t know what is it called)but air curves around it becoming more stable when getting into inlet. Before that I must rework Minus jet on the previous page. It lacks ease of fluidity and coloring is blunt. P.S. - Here is one unfinished design. I am still working on the inlet as well. The whole design is still raw. I am still considering if it should have a wheel scheme as on B-52. As it has vert. stabilizers below wings maybe I should add small chassis at bottom of each stabilizer.As to inlets here is one of my older designs that I updated for stabilizing air flow. I also used canopy from it for the last design.

NGAD. This is unfinished initial sketch for NGAD. I decided to unite vertical and horizontal stabilizers into one system.This stabilizer will rotate around axis of engine structure. I thought about this previously but was not sure how to ensure rigidity of rather large wing area that would be moving. So I went for attachment to engine bay. It would have large enough radius to support stabilizers. Those stabilizers would be rotating on bearings around engine assembly ( circular) so there would be enough strength for large G loads. This would also allow experiments on manoeuverability. It would be possible to rotate them even at negative angles below main wing surface. At level flights the stabilizers would be at flat angle with main wings. At plus angles they could move upwards at any angle, as far as they would meet each other( or close to it.). The current NGAD is awesome, the only thing I feel like the tail section is missing those stabilizers. Some aircraft look cool without them, for example, X-36, but some not so much. But that is only my personal opinion, not more.

The engine is actually deeper within wells, because of heat dissipation to lower heat signature. So the center of mass won`t be that much rearwards. If you look at f-18 , its engines also seem protruded rearwards and it is not even stealth. So, I will disagree. Anyway, it is a raw sketch and I am exercising ideas so changes might apply as well. Here is a sketch of a jet hydroplane. I will add other views to detail the design.

The hydroplane could probably look something like this. It is still a raw sketch of ideas, but it is slowly taking shape:) Also, an updated older sketch of YF-38. I am still not happy with it, but anyway.

Clever the way you have integrated engines with wings on those transports.

However, on the jet hydroplane, I would crank the wings in the other direction because bolting the wings' center section directly to the fuselage would shorten load-paths and reduce interference drag. Then crank the outer wings upwards outboard of the engine nacelles. High outer wing panels will whack fewer docks, trucks, fork-lifts, etc.

The greatest challenge is making it maneuverable enough to reverse onto docks so that it can unload straight out the back end. Thrust-reversers pointing up, over top of the wings?

Either way, you still need to keep engine inlets well above the waves to minimize water-ingestion. Floats will help reduce spray directly into engine intakes.

Sorry dude, I was not trying to tell you how to draw your pretty pictures. ..... Instead, I was looking at your sketches from a truck-driver's perspective and trying to figure out the easiest way to unload cargo.

Interesting, but I wouldn't want to have to work on that wing structure, and it'd be expensive to engineer and manufacture. Burying the engines in the wings is uncommon for a reason, though, having to do with airflow (see DeHavilland Comet), and drag.

NGAD. Top view. The rotating vertical stabilizers at their lowest position and alignment with the wing. As they are rotating on a hub around engine exhaust assembly ( this idea was developed as it offered enough power shoulder to support a movable stabilizer) they could be rotating at negative angles as well. That is, below alignment line with the wing.

I decided to rework Bell FCX-001. Initially I wanted to modify it just slightly, but in the end I redesigned all of it just leaving the main rotor intact. I t turned out a bit classic, not futuristic or conceptual enough but at least it retains some Bell family design features.

What aircraft would you like to be sketched? I can do a new design for an existing or theoretical program or rework my older designs. The hydroplane was my older sketch reworked.

Some possible ideas:

(1) A blended wing body bomber with stealth characteristics.(2) A supersonic propeller-driven aircraft.(3) What you think a replacement for the A-10 Thunderbolt II would look like.(4) A single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) space plane similar to the Skylon concept.(5) An aircraft that can also dive under the water like a submarine.(6) Your thoughts on what a modern, advanced descendant of the Triebflügel VTOL aircraft would look like.(7) A hypothetical anti-gravity aircraft resulting from research done during Project Greenglow.(8) An aircraft designed specifically to beat the time-to-height record.(9) An aircraft that can operate in the atmosphere of another planet like Venus or Jupiter (probably nuclear or solar-powered).(10) An aircraft that can go as fast as possible while still staying in the atmosphere.

@kryptid.1. Blended Wing ( bomber) Stealth. Sounds very tempting. I will consider sketching it. Would you like a passenger type , similar to Boeing x-48 scale model, or a military platform?2. A supersonic propeller driven aircraft is a problem as most aircraft would require jet engine to achieve such speeds. I think effectiveness of prop engines end at Mach 0 .9. I could design an aircraft with a shrouded propfan. My gut feeling tells me it is the only way to have a propeller and supersonic in one sentence. Turboprop won`t cut it. Actually, I am not a big fan of propellers. ( pun intended.)3. Actually I sketched a Thunderbolt replacement a year ago but quit the design as I was not happy with it. I could try improving on it and post it.4. SSTO plane. Sounds tempting, but limitations apply to the design as it is a very high speed platform.5. Submersible aircraft? Could you give me a reason for such an aircraft to exist?6. Triebflugel is bonkers ( in a good, bizarre way). I think Blue Origin might fill that gap.7. Antigravity aircraft wouldn`t be an exterior design issue , rather a mechanical issue. As I don`t know the principles of how the antigravity operates, it is hard to surmise its shape. All I can speculate is that such a craft would still be a subject to air drag. My personal intuition tells me that antigravity alone is nothing, you need propulsion as well. Antigravity sounds like compensating an existing force, while propulsion is an internal source of energy within a craft. Personally I think an air balloon with laughing gas is an antigravity aircraft as it compensates gravity with lighter than air gas in it. Yet they don`t fly zig zags or hyperspeeds as claimed by Bob Lazar or his sidekick John Lear( John is not well in his basement lately, recently installed A/C though). I wonder when Ben Rich said we are light years ahead and we could take ETs home did he mean money laundering schemes under project classification or he meant real aircraft:) Would antigravity work similarly to Fouche's claim of rotating Mercury plasma? I have my doubts about Fouche. When I talked to him about how would the superfast TR-3B deal with air friction( drag) at high speeds he started talking about electronic plasma field similar to one invented by Russian scientists( unnamed). I think plasma field is not enough to compensate claimed speeds within air theater. So do we need a circular space within an aircraft to place the rotating plasma tank or is anti-gravity a different animal after all- I don`t know. I feel that we can not create antigravity device, but we could one day build a gravity disrupting device, a device that actually doesn`t directly deal with gravity but intensifies an existing force that is co-existing with gravity and disrupts/intensifies its force. The secret of gravity probably lies within mass, rotation and electric force.8. Do you mean the fastest altitude gaining aircraft or something different?9. For an aircraft to operate in atmosphere of Jupiter I would go nuclear as it is is energy efficient and in case of crash there is not any damage to any beings. Designwise it has a lot of interpretation.10. Record braking atmospheric aircraft. Again, such an aircraft would have limited design options as it is subject to extreme air drag and would adopt the design of currently existing hyperspeed design platforms. I could try to design a pulse detonation wave engined craft:) which one would you like to be sketched first?

1. Blended Wing ( bomber) Stealth. Sounds very tempting. I will consider sketching it. Would you like a passenger type , similar to Boeing x-48 scale model, or a military platform?

Something shaped (generally) like the X-48, but sized-up and modified to be a bomber. Some serrated edges and edge alignment for stealth.

Quote

2. A supersonic propeller driven aircraft is a problem as most aircraft would require jet engine to achieve such speeds. I think effectiveness of prop engines end at Mach 0 .9. I could design an aircraft with a shrouded propfan. My gut feeling tells me it is the only way to have a propeller and supersonic in one sentence. Turboprop won`t cut it. Actually, I am not a big fan of propellers. ( pun intended.)

Experiments with the XF-88B demonstrated that propellers, if designed properly, can produce positive thrust above the sound barrier. If I remember correctly, the propeller was 71% efficient at speeds slightly above Mach 1. Modern design techniques would probably make it easier, such as utilizing area rule.

Quote

3. Actually I sketched a Thunderbolt replacement a year ago but quit the design as I was not happy with it. I could try improving on it and post it.

Sounds good.

Quote

4. SSTO plane. Sounds tempting, but limitations apply to the design as it is a very high speed platform.

Yeah, which is why Skylon has to be so big with most of its volume taken up by propellant.

Quote

5. Submersible aircraft? Could you give me a reason for such an aircraft to exist?

The wingtip ramjets might conceivably be replaced with something that can tolerate lower speeds such as small turbojets or turbofans, or you could even make the rotor powered by an engine in the fuselage in addition to a counter-rotor to offset torque.

Quote

7. Antigravity aircraft wouldn`t be an exterior design issue , rather a mechanical issue. As I don`t know the principles of how the antigravity operates, it is hard to surmise its shape. All I can speculate is that such a craft would still be a subject to air drag. My personal intuition tells me that antigravity alone is nothing, you need propulsion as well. Antigravity sounds like compensating an existing force, while propulsion is an internal source of energy within a craft. Personally I think an air balloon with laughing gas is an antigravity aircraft as it compensates gravity with lighter than air gas in it. Yet they don`t fly zig zags or hyperspeeds as claimed by Bob Lazar or his sidekick John Lear( John is not well in his basement lately, recently installed A/C though). I wonder when Ben Rich said we are light years ahead and we could take ETs home did he mean money laundering schemes under project classification or he meant real aircraft:) Would antigravity work similarly to Fouche's claim of rotating Mercury plasma? I have my doubts about Fouche. When I talked to him about how would the superfast TR-3B deal with air friction( drag) at high speeds he started talking about electronic plasma field similar to one invented by Russian scientists( unnamed). I think plasma field is not enough to compensate claimed speeds within air theater. So do we need a circular space within an aircraft to place the rotating plasma tank or is anti-gravity a different animal after all- I don`t know. I feel that we can not create antigravity device, but we could one day build a gravity disrupting device, a device that actually doesn`t directly deal with gravity but intensifies an existing force that is co-existing with gravity and disrupts/intensifies its force. The secret of gravity probably lies within mass, rotation and electric force.

It's true that we don't know how actual anti-gravity would work, but it would be interesting considering what direction aircraft design could go if we were freed up from a need for wings, rotors or balloons.

Quote

8. Do you mean the fastest altitude gaining aircraft or something different?

Yes. Something like the McDonnell Douglas Streak Eagle or Sukhoi P-42. Except without the need to be agile or carry weapons.

Quote

9. For an aircraft to operate in atmosphere of Jupiter I would go nuclear as it is is energy efficient and in case of crash there is not any damage to any beings. Designwise it has a lot of interpretation.

That would make sense. Alternatively, a relatively normal jet or propeller engine would work on Jupiter, but in reverse: the atmosphere of Jupiter is the fuel (hydrogen) and you carry tanks of oxidizer (like liquid oxygen or dinitrogen tetroxide) on board your plane. Unless it was lighter-than-air (a difficult prospect in a hydrogen atmosphere), it would need somewhere to land eventually since chemical engines use up fuel/oxidizer quickly. Nuclear is probably the best.

Quote

10. Record braking atmospheric aircraft. Again, such an aircraft would have limited design options as it is subject to extreme air drag and would adopt the design of currently existing hyperspeed design platforms. I could try to design a pulse detonation wave engined craft:)

Most likely, yes. I recently wondered just how high an air-breathing aircraft could fly. It would have to be very fast in order for dynamic pressure to make up for the low density in the high atmosphere. My basic guess is that the upper altitude and speed for any such aircraft are limited by high temperatures.

Quote

which one would you like to be sketched first?

It doesn't matter to me. Whichever one suits your mood the most or, perhaps, whichever you think would challenge your skills as a designer or artist the most.

For the first design I decided to go for a blended wing design. It is a double fuselage , blended wing refueling aircraft. It is inspired by Manta Ray fish and mimmicks some of its elements. On top view I spent more time developing the shape, the ink sketches were done first that is why some elements differ. I could either work detailed ISO view or rework the design completely if it is not satisfactory. Anyway for one view the design should be finalised so that different rotation views would not change elements later. Refueling hose would look similar to Manta Ray`s tail. Paint scheme could adopt the spotty pigmentation as seen on Mantas.

Nice one. A multiple fuselage design could be good for extra fuel storage in a tanker, although both fuselages would have to be emptied at the same rate in order to prevent a shift in the center of gravity. It probably wouldn't be too hard to implement, though. A single, large fuselage could probably accomplish the same thing for less drag (less surface area), but the double fuselage design would have the benefit of additional span-loading and taking up less hangar space because it's shorter.

Hi there, I `ve been away for some time, so decided to post some sketches. I was asked if I could rework the current Toyota Avalon. So here is the original by Toyota and my reworked version. Some aircraft sketches will come as well.

6th generation fighter. I decided to leave vertical stabilizers with a possibility to pivot them at positive and negative angles or aligned with the main wing. To withstand extreme G forces the stabilizers are attached to a rotating hub around engine assembly. Without any stabilizers aerodynamic stability in manoeuvers could be compromised. That`s just my 2 cents.